Legal Liability of Notaries for Formal Defects in Deeds of Guarantee as Instruments of Evidence in the Resolution of Financing Disputes: An Analysis Based on the Theory of Evidence and the Theory of Legal Responsibility
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30652/tnjkj213Keywords:
Formal Defects, Security Deeds, Evidentiary Force, Notarial LiabilityAbstract
This study examines the legal liability of notaries for formal defects in security deeds and their implications for the evidentiary value of such deeds in the resolution of financing disputes. Authentic deeds serve as a primary legal instrument for ensuring certainty in high-risk financing transactions; therefore, any formal non-compliance may significantly affect their probative force. The central issue addressed in this research is how formal irregularities influence the evidentiary strength of security deeds and to what extent a notary may be held liable when such defects result in losses to the parties involved. This research employs a normative legal method, applying statutory, conceptual, and case-based approaches. The findings demonstrate that formal defects may undermine both the external and formal evidentiary validity of security deeds, potentially degrading their status to private deeds. Such a shift weakens the creditor’s evidentiary position and impairs the effective enforcement of secured rights. From the perspective of liability theory, notarial accountability is generally fault-based, requiring proof of negligence or intent, actual damage, and a causal nexus between the notary’s conduct and the loss incurred. The novelty of this article lies in the development of an integrated analytical framework that bridges evidentiary theory and liability theory to distinguish between reparable formal defects and fatal defects that directly diminish evidentiary force. The study underscores the necessity of strict procedural compliance, heightened professional diligence, and proportionate accountability mechanisms to safeguard legal certainty in financing practices while preserving the institutional independence of the notarial profession.
References
Alfatahri, Muhammad, dan Azhari Yahya. “The Responsibility of the Notary regarding the Fulfillment of the Elements of Article 41 of the Notary Office Law.” Beijing Law Review 13 (2022): 81.
Alfath, Safira Rasheesa. “Tanggung Jawab Hukum Notaris dan Pengurus Perusahaan atas Pembuatan Akta Korporasi.” Jurnal Penelitian Serambi Hukum 19, no. 01: 250–262. https://doi.org/10.59582/sh.v19i01.1427
Astariyani, Ni Luh Gede, dan Endi Pratama. “Peran Notaris dalam Memperkuat Fungsi Hukum sebagai Sarana Rekayasa Sosial.” Acta Comitas: Jurnal Hukum Kenotariatan 10, no. 02 (2025): 275–289. https://doi.org/10.24843/AC.2025.v10.i02.p4.
Brigarys, Chintia Ayala. “Pertanggungjawaban Etik Notaris atas Akta Notaril RUPS yang Menyimpang dari Kehendak Para Pihak.” Kertha Semaya: Journal Ilmu Hukum 13, no. 11 (2025): 2649–2661. https://doi.org/10.24843/KS.2025.v13.i11.p17.
Cevitra, Mendy, dan Gunawan Djajaputra. “Perbuatan Melawan Hukum (Onrechtmatige Daad) Menurut Pasal 1365 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata dan Perkembangannya.” UNES Law Review 6, no. 1 (2023): 2722–2731. https://doi.org/10.31933/unesrev.v6i1.1074
Cristina, Jojor, dan Indri Manalu. “Analisis Peran Alat Bukti dan Keterangan Saksi dalam Menentukan Keputusan Pengadilan Pidana.” Jurnal Kajian Hukum dan Kebijakan Publik 3, no. 1 (2025): 245–263. https://doi.org/10.62379/6vsnhe93.
Gulo, Nimerodi, dan Cornelius Dikae Zolohefona Gulo. “Timbulnya Keyakinan Hakim dalam Hukum Pembuktian Perkara Pidana di Peradilan Indonesia.” UNES Law Review 6, no. 3 (2024): 8115–8122. https://doi.org/10.31933/unesrev.v6i3.1672
Gusarov, Kostiantyn, Olena Oleksandrivna Shchokina, Iryna Mykolayivna Cherevatenko, Olena Viktorivna Kolisnyk, dan Yana Leonidivna Kolomiets. “Preventive Function of a Notary in the Legal System of Society.” Documenta & Instrumenta 21 (2023): 111–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/docu.88106.
Hutabarat, Sumiaty Adelina, Ica Karina, Jupri Wandy Banjarnahor, Asmak ul Hosnah, dan Nur Asmarani. Pengantar Hukum Pidana: Teori dan Implementasi pada Era Revolusi Industri 4.0 Menuju Era Society 5.0. PT. Sonpedia Publishing Indonesia, 2024.
Marlina, Yuli, Iyah Faniyah, dan Syofiarti. “Pembinaan dan Pengawasan Notaris dalam Upaya Penegakan Tugas serta Fungsi Jabatan oleh Majelis Pengawas Daerah.” Unes Journal of Swara Justisia 9, no. 3 (2025): 549–558. https://doi.org/10.31933/6ct0z286
Maysarah, Maysarah. “Tindak Pidana Kuasa Penuh dalam Perjanjian Fidusia Pembiayaan Kendaraan Bermotor.” IURIS STUDIA: Jurnal Kajian 1, no. 1 (Juni 2020): 39–48. http://jurnal.bundamediagrup.co.id/index.php/iuris.
Nabila, Marcelina Siti, dan Pieter E. Latumeten. “Penerapan Sanksi Administratif terhadap Notaris yang Melakukan Pelanggaran terhadap Jabatannya (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara No. 235/G/2019/PTUN.KT).” UNES Law Review 6, no. 2; 5274-5282. (2023). https://doi.org/10.31933/unesrev.v6i2.1354.
Nadya, Siti Ahsanu. “The Validity of Credit Agreement Deeds Non-Compliant with the Law on the Office of Notaries: A Review from the Perspective of Legal Certainty and Accountability.” Al-Qanun: Jurnal Kajian Sosial dan Hukum Islam 7, no. 1 (2026): 43–51.
Nasution, Krisnadi. “Penerapan Prinsip Tanggung Jawab Pengangkut terhadap Penumpang Bus Umum.” Jurnal Mimbar Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada 26, no. 1 (2014): 55–71.
Pyarrani, Dilla, dan Sisca Ferawati Burhanuddin. “Peran Notaris dalam Menjamin Keabsahan dan Autentisitas Akta Kredit Perbankan.” Jurnal USM Law Review 8, no. 3 (2025). https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v8i3.10081
Ramadhan, Irpan. “Analisis Terkait Akta Otentik sebagai Alat Bukti dalam Perkara Hukum Perdata.” AL-DALIL: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Politik, dan Hukum 2, no. 3: 32–37. https://doi.org/10.58707/aldalil.v2i3.875.
Ramadhani, Devira, Hasim Purba, dan Sutiarnoto. “Tanggung Jawab Notaris terhadap Akta Perjanjian Jual Beli Rumah yang Dikeluarkan Berdasarkan Keterangan Palsu oleh Para Pihak (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Nomor 433/Pdt.G/2021/PN.Mdn).” Rewang Rencang: Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis 6, no. 4 (2025): 1–29. https://doi.org/10.56370/jhlg.v6i4.1369.
Rohidah, Rohidah, Putra Hutomo, dan Yuliana Setiadi. “Tanggung Jawab Notaris terhadap Akta Pernyataan Keputusan Rapat Umum Pemegang Saham yang Didasarkan pada Risalah Rapat Palsu.” Politica: Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara dan Politik Islam 12, no. 2 (2025): 509–520. https://doi.org/10.32505/politica.v12i2.13182
Sa’adah, Sa’adah, Saima Amalia, Hildatul Hidayah, dan Siti Rahma Anggita. “Analisis Yuridis atas Akta Notaris yang Cacat Hukum dan Implikasinya terhadap Keabsahan Perjanjian.” Indonesian Journal of Islamic Jurisprudence, Economic and Legal Theory 3, no. 2 (2025): 1566–1573. https://doi.org/10.62976/ijijel.v3i2.1146
Sa’adah, Sa’adah, Saima Amalia, Hildatul Hidayah, dan Siti Rahma Anggita. “Analisis Yuridis atas Akta Notaris yang Cacat Hukum dan Implikasinya terhadap Keabsahan Perjanjian.” Indonesian Journal of Islamic Jurisprudence, Economic and Legal Theory 3, no. 2 (2025): 1566–1573. https://doi.org/10.62976/ijijel.v3i2.1146
Silviana, Ana. “Fungsi Surat Kuasa Memasang Hak Tanggungan (SKMHT) dalam Pemberian Hak Tanggungan (Studi Perspektif UU No. 4 Tahun 1996 tentang Hak Tanggungan Beserta Benda-Benda yang Berkaitan dengan Tanah).” Diponegoro Private Law Review 4, no. 1 (Juni 2020): 28–39.
Sirait, Gladys Natalie Aurielle. “Liability of Notarial Deeds as Authentic Deeds in Accordance with the Notary Office Law.” UNES Law Review 5, no. 4 (2023): 3363–3378. https://doi.org/10.31933/unesrev.v5i4.641
Soenartha, Kevin Varrisco Christoven, Kadek Januarsa Adi Sudharma, Anak Agung Ayu Intan Puspadewi, dan Dewa Ayu Putri Sukadana. “Kekuatan Hukum Kontrak yang Dibuat Tanpa Akta Notaris Menurut KUH Perdata.” Al-Zayn: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial & Hukum 3, no. 6 (2025): 8089–8098. https://doi.org/10.61104/alz.v3i6.2517
Sriyanto, Salsabilla Azahra. “Cyber Notary Regulation in Indonesia: Juridical Challenges and Proposed Model for Ensuring the Authenticity and Evidentiary Strength of Electronic Notarial Deeds.” Al-Risalah Jurnal Ilmu Syariah dan Hukum (2025): 876–893. https://doi.org/10.24252/al-risalah.vi.61843.
Sucia, Yossiramah, dan Meissy Putri Deswari. “Bukti Elektronik dalam Sistem Peradilan: Memahami Peran dan Validitasnya.” Innovative: Journal of Social Science Research 4, no. 4: 13729–13741. https://doi.org/10.31004/innovative.v4i4.14698
Suryanto, Jane Patricia. “Analisis Yuridis terhadap Tindak Pidana Pemalsuan Akta Otentik oleh Notaris: Studi Kasus No. 146 K/PID/2015.” UNES Law Review 6, no. 3 (2024): 8095–8104. https://doi.org/10.31933/unesrev.v6i3.1689
Syahbana, Tengku Rizq Frisky. “Peran Notaris untuk Mewujudkan Kepastian Hukum Pengalihan Hak Merek Terdaftar dalam Pelaksanaan Homologasi Akibat Debitor Pailit.” Jurnal Notarius: Program Studi Kenotariatan Pascasarjana UMSU 11, no. 2 (2025): 84–99.
Tripipo, Amirahni Zahra, Rembrandt, dan Hasbi. “Tanggungjawab Notaris terhadap Akta yang Tidak Dibacakan Notaris di Hadapan Para Pihak (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 351 PK/PDT/2018).” Unes Journal of Swara Justisia 8, no. 4 (2025). https://doi.org/10.31933/ws1xgd96
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Elsa Novitri, Budi Santoso , Elli Ruslina (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) license allows others to share, adapt, and build upon your work, but only for non-commercial purposes and under the same license terms. Specifically, it requires attribution to the original creator, prohibits commercial use, and mandates that any derivative works are also shared under the same CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
